Consume Product

Easy to explain. The 'Right' nowadays is simply the wastebasket into which the Left, dominant in the West and thus having the power to define what is 'Left' and 'Right', throws everything that disagrees with it. Only what agrees with it remains Left, and that becomes more and more pure as time passes and all deviance from the Left's party line is salami-sliced.

For instance, I don't agree on much of anything with libertarians, but we're both 'Right' within an American context. The difference between Democrats and Antifa is far less than the distance between myself and libertarians. Literal neo-Bolsheviks like Hinkle and Maupin are 'Right' within the American context, Hinkle, in particular, clearly seems to favour the Republicans over the Democrats. It is likely that I have more in common with both than I do with the average Democrat voter, possibly even more than with the average libertarian. Observations like these are why this infographic seems 'true'.

You've got a highly and increasingly homogenous group on the Left, excepting certain non-white groups like the 'Somali-Americans' who hope to use the Left to their advantage, but which comes at great cost to themselves given how incompatible Leftism is with most religions, including practically all sub-groups of Islam.

On the 'Right', you've got everything from certain neo-Bolsheviks (e.g. 'MAGA Communists'), libertarians, Evangelicals, the Filipino and Vietnamese communities (last I checked, a majority of voters from both are Republican, all other Asian communities are majority Democrat), to literal neo-Nazis. Hinkle and Maupin are probably voting Republican at the same time as Dr. David Duke, who to my knowledge still has not given up on voting for them. At the same time, an overt black supremacist like Ayo Kimathi, who hated Obama for being a 'gay mulatto', is voting along with them. No wonder the red is so dispersed: a motley collection of White racialists, certain black racialists, the odd neo-Bolshevik, many libertarians, Christians of all kinds, and many others that in most times would be rivals or enemies rather than within one political party.

Next, just look at who is most popular on the American 'Right': Trump, Musk, Gabbard, Vivek. All former Democrats. Plenty of Republicans also openly like Joe Manchin, and they like him far more than Democrats like any Republican politician. When you get salami-sliced out of the Left and start spouting that 'I didn't leave the Left, the Left left me' narrative like the TERFs, you are forced over to the Right, and they embrace you in a way that never occurs in reverse. Republicans cling to former Democrats who join their side, and make them their leaders; Democrats, by contrast, still despise the Cheneys and would never make them the leaders of anything.

Isn't it obvious that the Republican Party is simply the party of everyone that the Left has thrown out? People once considered polar opposites are now on the same side. They have been forced to one side by the Left, which has become so extreme and alien to the point that they have greatly vertically extended the political spectrum, having embraced things that not long ago would have been thought impossible and thus not accommodated for on it. So much of what was once regarded as Far-Left is now regarded as Centrist or even Rightist (e.g. Marx, Lenin, and Stalin would all be regarded as Right-Wing if they were here today), and the Left today is off-the-charts Left, simply not fitting on past political spectrums.

If the Left wants to look more like the Right on that infographic, they need to be more tolerant of diversity of thought, which is highly unlikely to ever happen in any enduring, sincere way. That ship has sailed long ago.

The result is 'true' because the average person's conception of 'Left' and 'Right' is completely screwed. The Left define themselves as Left and other everyone else as Right over the most minuscule of differences. If they want a more accurate result, they would have to reject the idea that much of what is 'Right' is actually Right-Wing, and redefine much of it as Centrist and Leftist, and they won't do that, because academia hasn't been independent of the Left in decades.

Being university-educated was once an indicator of increased Rightism, but it has become a marker of increased Leftism especially since the 1950s, that is, the decade when it became apparent to Right-Wing academics, e.g. Robert Nisbet within sociology, that a hostile takeover was taking place and they began to be vocal about it. Sociology's capture by the Left was essentially complete by the 1990s. A yiddish 'neo-con' sociologist, Irving Louis Horowitz, was funnily one of the last, say, 'former' Leftist, or non-Leftist - for he was once something like a Trotskyite - academic sociologists left in America, and probably the last one of note to bemoan the takeover.

There have been a few studies on American sociologists in the 1980s-90s that showed that 'radicals' were already by far the largest plurality, possibly majority, 'liberals' or 'moderates' were far behind, and 'conservatives' were practically non-existent. That showed that sociology had underwent great change for the worse, having ended up like this less than 200 years after having been founded by people with sympathies, most notably Comte, to the counter-revolutionaries: those counter-revolutionaries who remain accepted, even today, as proto-sociologists. This is probably part of the reason that sociology comes off as a kind of 'joke' of a field today: if you're a Republican, you're looking at something from which you have long been eliminated, at a sort of enemy territory.

Another finding at the time was that sociology was rapidly turning female-majority, which is no doubt related to these political changes, especially since the 1980s was when Left-Right convergence between men and women had been reached in America and the new divergence, of which practically everyone is aware, began, that is, that of women increasingly moving Leftward of men.

I'd argue it's part of their strength. They're all more or less on the same page, which is why they can get shit done when they're in office.

When Republicans get in office it's all meetings and conferences and committees that lead to nothing. Dems get in office and it's unanimous votes!

right/left is a false dichotomy. in fact, many of the people "on the right" are actually leftists from the 1980s-2000s. our current "republican belief-system" is a collection of very liberal ideas mixed with neocon globalist foreign policies. nothing like a real republican from the founding of our nation.

red/blue on this chart are essentially the same group. zoom out the graph. you'll see the real Roman Republic White nationalists as a distinct group.

Diversity of political thought has never been a nation’s strength.